conduit VS clap-rs

I'd like to suggest Conduit. I found it very easy to install and maintain. https://gitlab.com/famedly/conduit

> "At least as standard" how?

There are 8 people who vote on changes to the Matrix spec (the Spec Core Team), 7 of which are Element employees (including Matthew, Element's CEO). Element also controls the development of clients and servers used by the large majority of users in the public federation.

> A substantial portion of the IRC comunity is actively hostile to the IRCv3 extensions, and in some cases prefer incompatible implementations of the same functionality; Matrix has nothing like that going on.

But any IRC client will work fine on any IRC server, and they can connect to various servers with different implementations.

On Matrix, clients (generally) can only connect to one homeserver at a time; which forces them to converge on following exactly the same spec. And if your server differs ever so slightly from the other ones in how it implements some parts of the spec (room consensus), then it can be split-brained from the rest of the federation. Instead, changes to the room consensus are done by pushing new room versions, and each server implementation needs to explicitly support it or they can't join it. This means Synapse devs (which are a majority of Element employees) get to decide what room versions can get traction.

It is not uncommon for people in the Matrix community to complain about this and Element keeping specs in limbo, and PRs to the flagship clients being stuck in "design review tar".

> And there seem to be more visibly independent implementations of Matrix than IRCv3.

Clients, maybe, at least in the number of implementation. It's hard to find stats of this, but I feel that >95% of people in the public federation use Element even in tech-y rooms; IRC has a healthier mix of major clients (weechat, irssi, IRCCloud, Hexchat, KiwiIRC, The Lounge each have >5% of desktop/web users). But I admit that's just my very subjective point of view.

In terms of servers, Matrix has three open source ones as far as I know: Synapse (controlled by Element), Dendrite (controlled by Element, and almost on par with Synapse according to https://arewep2pyet.com/ ), and Conduit. Based on https://gitlab.com/famedly/conduit/-/milestones/3 , Conduit seems to be far from implementing the spec yet (eg. it doesn't seem to support leaving rooms or respecting history visibility).

> things like: server-side history extensions tended to mess up my client's history implementation (I'd end up with multiple copies of the same messages in my local logs, often with the wrong timestamps)

You can use https://ircv3.net/specs/extensions/message-ids to deduplicate them.

> And if you're in a conversation where people are using embedded gifs, then fundamentally you'll always be a second-class citizen if you're trying to participate in that with a client that can't display embedded gifs.

A conversation where people where people are using embedded gifs will exclude me regardless of client, because they are too distracting. At least on IRC I can expect people not to do it too much, and use words or emojis instead of reaction gifs.

> SSO access control; you just can't do that in a nice way if the client doesn't support it

That's a fair point; IRC is made by hobbyists more than companies, so that's not surprising. There is some discussion around it though: https://github.com/ircv3/ircv3-ideas/issues/74 and Sourcehut is sponsoring implementation (https://emersion.fr/blog/2022/irc-and-oauth2/).

To start, this will be strictly Non-Federated. Just a few friends will be using this. Here: https://gitlab.com/famedly/conduit/-/blob/next/DEPLOY.md is the documentation I am following. It tells me I must "use my server name", but what is this exactly? What do I put in there? Do I have to go out and buy a domain?

Either Tinode (https://github.com/tinode/chat) or Matrix Protocol (https://gitlab.com/famedly/conduit)

Matrix Protocol: Fractal (Client), Conduit (Server)

If self-hosting is an option then I'd say Matrix, you can try Conduit (server) and Elements(client). To simplify deployment you can refer to this repo.

You can babble on and on about how its not how you do it, no one needs it, etc... But its a demonstrable need in this space and its caused me great pain trying to write applications that would be used by such people. It's even bit Conduit to the point they have 5+ DB backends coded in now that the user can choose between based on their local system setups.

Give Conduit a try. It uses way less memory than Synapse. It is still in early stages but works great. I have been running one on a Pi4 for like a year, going great so far.

There's a Rust implementation of a Matrix server that uses sled: https://gitlab.com/famedly/conduit/

We will be using the library for Clap - A simple-to-use, efficient, and full-featured library for parsing command line arguments and subcommands.

I recently came across this question (and associated answer) on the clap repository. The answer given is a good one. But I wanted to expand with my own findings and practices, which spurred the motivation for this post.

We can also use tuple-like struct syntax and named-field struct syntax for enum variants within our enum; this is because unlike in other OOP languages, Rust enums are actually sum types. You can read more about how powerful Rust enums are in another article we wrote here. You can have optional arguments by simply wrapping the types in Option, but if you want to add a flag to a command you can use bool, since clap recognises that flags are either there or not there. Let's have a look at what this might look like:

I began by developing a wrapper for the CurseForge API, which turned out to be a lengthy and challenging process but constituted the bulk of the work. Next, I coded the CLI, which was relatively straightforward. Instead of using the clap crate, a Rust tool for generating CLIs, I opted for the following line of code:

By this time I had already gotten tired of parsing arguments by myself and had looked for something to help with that. I found a really dang good argument parsing library called clap. What makes it so cool is it's largely declarative for common uses. You simply mark up a struct with attributes, and the parser automatically generates the usage and all the argument parsing code.

How CLI arguments are handled (using clap).

Is this just referring to wrapping based on the terminal width? That is supported with the wrap_help feature though I have been considering making it a default feature.

CLI, use Clap. If you want to get fancy, use Tui.

As our CLI is getting more complex, we'll use the clap crate to parse the command line arguments.